Image 01 Image 03

Maybe the readers are right, and sunshine is not enough

Maybe the readers are right, and sunshine is not enough

There’s something Bill Maher understands. What goes around comes around.

Media Matters and Think Progress can organize a campaign to attack Rush Limbaugh’s advertisers as a means — they hope — of forcing him off the air.  But what goes around comes around.

And it will.

So Maher has come to Limbaugh’s defense not on substance, but on the tactic of attacking advertisers:

Coming from Maher, there is a certain irony since he called Sarah Palin the “C” word, for which I don’t think he’s ever apologized:

I would prefer that advertisers be left alone.

But maybe the readers are right, and I was too squeamish yesterday. Maybe sunshine is not enough when fighting against the total political war.

I’ll have more on Carbonite later and in the coming days.

In the meantime, make your voices heard, because Media Matters and Think Progress can’t shut you up.

Update:  I stand with Rush.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Karma’s a b*tch ain’t she Mr.Maher…..
Nice to see people dropping HBO this week because Mr. Maher’s comments about women. 🙂

And Professor – you are doing a great job getting people informed and armed with facts! Thank you!

    ella8 in reply to tazz. | March 7, 2012 at 9:29 am

    I am dropping cable all together and boycotting the major networks. Apparently Anderson Cooper was the first one to use the teabagging term. The Grammy’s had a disgusting and overtly anti-Catholic performance. I could go on. The mainstream media spills out filth and bigotry daily. I will miss a small handful of stations but not many. I am keeping netfix for my kids and buying a Roku.

    Joan Of Argghh in reply to tazz. | March 7, 2012 at 9:59 am

    Hmmm. . . we can’t suppose that the FEC is looking into his hefty donation and someone on Obama’s staff is putting the screws to him, do you? I’m sure they want that $1M to stick.

From an ABC blog post (to which I won’t link):

“The list [of advertisers who have dropped Limbaugh under pressure] now includes: Geico, Netflix, Service Magic home contractor, Goodwill, Amberen menopause medication, PolyCom web conferencing, Hadeed Carpets, Accuquote Life Insurance, Vitacost vitamin supplier, Bonobos clothing company, Sensa weight- loss program, Thompson Creek Windows, AOL, Tax Resolution Services, ProFlowers, Legal Zoom online document creator, Carbonite web security firm, Citrix software maker, Sleep Train Mattresses, Sleep Number mattresses and Quicken Loans.”

    William A. Jacobson in reply to Will. | March 7, 2012 at 8:40 am

    While it certainly is true that numerous advertisers have left, don’t fall for the MMFA and TP trick of listing advertisers who never intentionally advertised on Rush but may have had a stray ad placed by an agency; when they then say in response to a call that they don’t advertise on Rush, MMFA and TP list them as a “drop.” This effectively is astroturfing, creating a sense of momentum beyond reality.

    AmandaFitz in reply to Will. | March 7, 2012 at 11:50 am

    Just now, listening to Michael Berry on my local station, KTRH, he was discussing the demographics of conservative talk radio and ad buyers (he was NOT talking about Rush, but something else). He said that the demographics of talk radio skew to an older population (yes, that’s me) BUT that the AD BUYERS are usually twenty-five year old females who work for the ad agencies in New York.

    This set me to thinking…Is it the AD BUYERS who are driving the boycott of Rush? They’d be the demographic who are still so indoctrinated into the Sandra Fluke sort of propaganda that they’d not realize that Rush’s audience is OLDER and doesn’t think highly of Sandra Fluke or her “reproductive justice” b.s.?

PrincetonAl | March 7, 2012 at 8:38 am

Two key things the socialists focus on:

(1) Control of message (through media, restrictions on freedom of press, etc.) … enough on that elsewhere.

(2) Control of the money

The advertiser pullout is just part of a total strategy to deny funding to opponents of all sorts. Its designed to weaken them and intimidate them everywhere.

(a) They attack big donors
(b) They attack businesses that do not support labor reform (see Boeing, Wisconsin)
(c) They go after businesses that donate to Republicans (see Gibson Guitars, proposed transparency requirements on government contractors to support intimidation)
(d) They go after individual donors with protests to cow them out of support

On their side, they look at union dues, perpetual slush funds for NGOs, donations to non-profits that appear to be for good cause (Humane Society, etc.) while pursuing anti-capitalist etc. … all so they have full-time, paid, dedicated staffers …

… while we are intimidated into not donating, our funding is cut off we do not comply, and our day jobs our threatened if we don’t fall into line.

And you better believe it is a doctrine within the party itself! Read HillBuzz, Kevin DuJan, an ex- on the ground Democratic operative. He details how just a typical organizer on the ground is taught to go after big donors, to do these things.

Its ingrained at all levels.

You better believe it is total political war. It is a mistake to underestimate your foe.

    ella8 in reply to PrincetonAl. | March 7, 2012 at 9:36 am

    Sandra Fluke (well she is the pretty face of a large movement) is doing this to take down the Catholic Church. These people don’t need birth control, they need the Church out of their way. There is anti-Catholic bigotry coming from all angles lately. It is strategic, they are making their move.

“It will now be much more permitted on the conservative side to dissent from Rush,” said Michael Medved, a conservative talk radio host who subbed for Limbaugh in the 1990s.
David Frum, the conservative pundit who has been critical of the party’s embrace of Limbaugh in the past, agrees this might weaken it.
“Republican politicians are going to want to keep more of a distance from Limbaugh after his incident,” he said.

Rush Limbaugh: Who’s afraid of him?

    Terri in reply to Terri. | March 7, 2012 at 8:46 am

    On page 2 of the article above:

    “The only Republican candidate who couldn’t be dragged into the Limbaugh bashing was his longtime friend and sometime foil Newt Gingrich, who, true to form, turned questions about Limbaugh’s comments into a critique of the mainstream media’s obsession with them.”

    Rosalie in reply to Terri. | March 7, 2012 at 9:09 am

    From what I’ve read, Frum is definitely not a conservative pundit. He’s just used by the left. Ace’s description of Frum really says it all.

    SmokeVanThorn in reply to Terri. | March 7, 2012 at 12:51 pm

    Medved is a squish – stopped listening to him in 2008.

I haven’t really cared about the whole slut* issue. However, I am a big fan of free speech so I thought I would add my opinion.

Freedom is great, but it comes with responsibilities. When Hollywood started proclaiming that they were being retaliated for their political speech during the Bush years, my response was always, “You have the right to say what you want, but I have a right to not buy your product if I disagree with you.”

Even though I am not a fan of Bush, it was during the leftist assault on his policies and then claiming they were victims that drove me from Hollywood. I can’t cancel HBO over Bill Maher, because I stopped buying cable a long time ago.

Back to Limbaugh and his advertisers. I think the advertisers have a right to leave Rush. At the same time, I have a right to NOT purchase any of their products.

The difference between this and the left: The left is more organized and floods companies with requests to pull advertising. This makes the companies think that a majority of the population agrees that they should pull advertising, when in fact they are just seeing a skewed result from a very vocal (and almost rabid) minority.

Should we do the same with lefty broadcasters such as Ed Schultz? I see no problem with that. After all, Bill Maher and Ed Schultz are the ones that spoke out first, if they lose advertisers (or subscribers to HBO), then that is a result of their irresponsible attitudes. The left would absolutely love it if they could FORCE you to buy their products, but that isn’t freedom.

I would almost argue that consevatives and libertarians have already been taking this approach for awhile, they just have been doing it quietly. Look at how many viewers MSNBC gets compared to Fox.

jimzinsocal | March 7, 2012 at 9:20 am

Its basically a twist (like Princeton Al suggests)on the recent Planned Parenthood deal. Step out of line or be seen supporting/not supporting the chosen position and it becomes war.
Are we really surprised given Obama’s past as a community organizer? Those folks thrive on pressure. Isolate and destroy.

    AmandaFitz in reply to jimzinsocal. | March 7, 2012 at 10:27 am

    Who will be left to stand for me? They’ve gone after the Komen Foundation and Nancy Brinker personally, Pat Buchannan, Rush Limbaugh (add any other names or group).

    Daily Caller exposed the coordination between the Obama White House and Media Matters. Before that, Journ0list was exposed, and A.C.O.R.N.

    Who WILL be left to stand for all of us?


The boycott is a beautiful tool, if used properly.

WITHOUT a coercive component (i.e., a Rev. Sharpton boycott that dragooned and bullied people into support) it is a purely voluntary, democratic, and free market exercise.

There is nothing remotely wrong with any of that.

Plus, if popularly supported, it is very effective. If NOT supported, it is a vacant exercise and powerless.

A BUYcott is very much the same thing, but with a more positive bent. When I bought my smart-phone, I chose Motorola because they support (if passively) Israel. But the effect was the same on Apple as if I had boycotted their product.

In any event, now is a time for grass-roots activism, in every theater we can find to express our views. What we buy and from whom is one POWERFUL tool to employ.

Flyover Conservative | March 7, 2012 at 9:42 am

So fitting out here that Rush is to be inducted into the Hall of Famous Missourians. Libs and Dems are furious. It’s actually guite funny watching them fall all over themselves whining and complaining.

Joan Of Argghh | March 7, 2012 at 9:53 am

Heh. To all of it.

It would be “nice” if we could play by the rules of decency but sooner or later we have to accept that the lies & manipulative spin put out by the Dems does become “truth” to many of the middle of the roaders who aren’t actively involved in politics.

If all someone hears is the lib spin on an issue they “assume” it’s true because most people don’t actively seek out what the other side is saying.

I have some friends who have little interest in politics I responded to their tsk, tsking about how mean they heard Rush was to “that poor young college girl”. I tried to explain who she was and how she seemed to have an agenda – their response was “where did you hear that – I didn’t read that in my newspaper.” I try to remember they have many other good qualities.

    Ragspierre in reply to katiejane. | March 7, 2012 at 10:13 am

    The most effective role we play is as educators, IMNHO. We all have family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, etc. who need to hear what we know, and need to see us living our principles.

    That is a Breitbart kinda thing we all NEED to do every day.

Nearly all of HBO’s programming ends up on Cable or Satellite or DVD eventually. I loved Deadwood and the Sopranos both of which I watched on DirecTv without subscribing to HBO. I haven’t subscribed to HBO since Bill Maher began his left wing hate fest.

myohmymanatee | March 7, 2012 at 10:12 am

Who wants to watch a misogynist p*g like Bill Maher who also denigrate women? He is no different from Howard Stern who paraded porn stars on his radio. Although, I agreed with Rush Limbaugh pointing the absurd with absurdity. Sandra Fluke is the useful idiot of Pelosi and send her off to Media Matters for PR purpose to hard press corporations. This is sooo… predictable from leftist propagandists phony outrage.

Sarah Palin’s “2 cents worth” had more clarity and courage than the total moral expenditure of the GOP political class on the issue.

I see that the “brave” actress Patricia Heaton who wrote a memorial to Breitbart promptly pivoted on Rush and threw him (and Breitbart) under the bus. This kind of cowardice in the clutch is why we’re losing.

“Be Breitbart” is an empty slogan so far. Breitbart’s lesson wasn’t about talking tough in our own little clubhouses, it was about standing up for each other in the public arena and calling out these thugs.

Sunshine definitely isn’t enough. Any gardener will tell you, you need fertilizer too if you want to grow anything. So they’re going to have to be covered in it! 🙂

At the memorandum thread yesterday, it appeared to me that ThinkProgress and Media Matters were organizing forces of pressure on inadvertent, intended or even ex-advertisers on Rush’s show.

Here’s a link that reports that…

“Led by liberal groups like ThinkProgress and Media Matters, with help from Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook users, advertisers are still being convinced to ditch Limbaugh’s show, at least temporarily, with the count now approaching 30”

The Reddit link in the article is enlightening in terms of the process the left is using. Seems to me they are trying to overwhelm in terms of social media and phone calls to advertisers (again whether current, ex, or unintended)

Netflix is a company that I am interested in their reaction in particular, even though they appear to be in the class of “inadvertent advertiser”. Netflix is a purveyor of all types of comedy/film/TV etc… free speech expression. Somehow I wonder if Bill Maher’s tweet didn’t have to do with the fact that he has many dvd’s of his work made available through Netflix.

With the blowback Rush Limbaugh is getting from some musicians, perhaps he would be in a position to commission a few new alternative rock bands to write some music for his show….

I canceled my orders with ProFlowers and Shari’s Berries after they dropped Rush. I have sent them several emails and have called them to express my anger with the company.

Now, for the fun part. I have been a customer of Red Envelope (another sister company of ProFlowers and Shari’s Berries) for as long as Red Envelope has been in business. After canceling with ProFlowers, I started getting emails from ALL of their sister companies- one after the other- companies I”ve never used. Instead of just deleting the emails, I’ve had to open each one, uncheck the boxes for “notify me when…” and then, “unsubscribe.” They do everything they can to keep on your email list, and assume that you’re not “really” mad at their treatment of Rush.

To the company that is the parent of PrFlowers, Shari’s Berries and Red Envelope, Yes, dear, I AM MAD. I AM FURIOUS at your treatment of Rush, and I WILL NEVER DO BUSINESS WITH ANY OF YOUR SUBSIDIARIES AGAIN.
I am a sixty-two year old female and I vote and I use my credit card! But never again with ProFlowers, et al!!!!!!!!!!

    MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to AmandaFitz. | March 7, 2012 at 11:21 am

    Support Rush by listening to him. Don’t let the size of his audience contract. Pay attention to his remaining advertisers. If you get the change to support them, do so.

    The key to Rush’s continued success isn’t the advertisers who have bolted, we can’t change their mind. The key is to support existing and future advertisers, and let THEM know that because they advertised with Rush it influenced your buying decision.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to AmandaFitz. | March 7, 2012 at 9:07 pm

    Better still -why do you need these services anyhow?

    If you want to send someone a gift – First ask yourself -Have they ever given me anything?If so go out & buy it yourself (or online ) & send it to the recipient’s address.

    Maybe even more so -send a card ($1 plus 50c postage) . It is the thought that counts after all 🙂 . At 62 you need to be saving your pennies.

Its interesting you don’t believe in boycotts, professor. Too bad the other side doesn’t agree, or do you have another name for what’s going on with the advertisers?

Midwest Rhino | March 7, 2012 at 10:47 am

FOX News is basically a buycott success story. They offered fair and balanced, with more conservative or independent commentary. Conservatives finally had an alternative.

But with FOX it is apparent. It takes more research for Motorola versus Apple.

Carbonite was already losing a dollar a share, so this attention grabbing play might actually help them, if liberals rally to their friend. The CEO has an obligation to his shareholders, so he has some explainin’ to do. But he did get a lot of free advertising, and he seems to be on a sinking ship.

Maher fears the radical left has awakened a sleeping giant. Their tools for making a majority bend to the small minority demands, is finally getting conservative leaning America’s attention.

Free and efficient markets work better if participants can not be coerced into paying protection money to leftist radicals. (or inversely, being coerced away from from supporting anyone associated with conservatives)

But if one side is going to inject politics into the market, the other side should play along. Either that or racketeering laws have to be applied (or whatever law that would fight such coercion, if there is one).

Netflix has the CNBC show “The Mob”. I had it on last night. A classic move is to insist on payment, or there “might be” labor problems, fires, problems with deliveries, etc. Since Democrats expand this power of threat to government (Boeing, Gibson Guitar, GM bondholders, Arizona, Catholic Church, etc.), the passive majority better get activated soon. Buycotts are one pretty good tool.

(I signed up supporting Rush, though I don’t listen to him.)

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Midwest Rhino. | March 7, 2012 at 11:07 am

    I should correct that .. with FOX, fair and balanced IS the product. With Motorola, the politics is seemingly separate.

    We grant “most favored” trade status on countries based on politics, why not companies?

    Ragspierre in reply to tazz. | March 7, 2012 at 10:59 am

    He already has. Who do you think ginned them up?

    I cannot think of any president in U.S. history that has so blatantly waged war on private citizens and companies, possibly excepting Wilson.

Hey Midwest Rhino. FYI: NetFlix is one that pulled its ads from Limbaugh.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to franklaughter. | March 7, 2012 at 11:17 am

    I saw that, but I only see three companies on the “I Support Rush” site. Netflix was not on there, or am I missing something. I figured it might be on that indirectly had an ad with him, so got counted in the astroturfing.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | March 7, 2012 at 11:37 am

The Austrian economists talk about a concept called “consumer sovereignty”. What it means is that in an economy where transactions occur voluntarily, the consumer votes with his dollars to decide which industries, companies, and products succeed and which fail.

We decide mostly on our perception of value. We evaluate price, functionality, dependability, utility, quality, warranty, colors, prestige, etc. and ultimately decide how to buy what we want/need.

There is absolutely no reason why the political affiliation of the seller can not, or should not, be part of the mix of variables that informs our purchasing decision. I, personally, have decided I will never buy Progressive Insurance because I vehemently disagree with the political views of the Chairman of the Board. I decided long ago I’d never see a Sean Penn or Oliver Stone movie in the theater, rent, or watch on cable. You get the idea.

So I had no problem sending Carbonite a letter telling them that while I am not a customer, I never will be. I did not say it was because I was upset that they withdrew advertising support for Rush. Instead, I said I could not support ANYONE who caves in to a bunch of agitators who want to censor and silence speech. What Rush said certainly may have been offensive to many. So what. They’ll get over it. A free society can survive offensive speech — but silencing or censoring speech can be fatal to a free society. It was short and based on a higher principle rather than defending what Rush said.

It’s your money. Until Obamacare is fully implemented, you get to decide how to send it. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with giving feedback to a company why you choose not to support it. Most managers value the feedback so they can make appropriate adjustments.

    Well done.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to MaggotAtBroadAndWall. | March 7, 2012 at 12:04 pm

    I’m wondering if a line is crossed when a tax exempt organization attacks companies because of the politics of an owner or CEO. That could lead to tax exempt donations from Company A, to a “charitable” organization that would demonize their Competitor B, essentially subsidizing A’s marketing.

    But with our government marketing the Volt directly, maybe we are way past those concerns. 🙂

LukeHandCool | March 7, 2012 at 11:43 am

Sunshine is good … with the help of a giant magnifying glass, it’s great.

Sunlight is nice, but a little mockery from Sunny is also nice:

markinsandyeggo | March 7, 2012 at 12:53 pm

So, I just tried to cancel my Carbonite subscription. I said that Unfortunately, I still have 2 years and 3 months left on my 3 year subscription. When I went on chat, they pointed me to a link on the Carbonite website that shows that they do not have to refund. I said “So, I made the mistake of making a long term commitment with a company that wants to make an issue of being opposite of me politically. Good job Carbonite. Ride it on down to bankruptcy.”

The terms of service says:

“If You cancel a subscription, Carbonite is not obligated to refund subscription charges already paid.”

So I am stuck, but I want to Be Breitbart. If I cancel, then it will show up in their subscriber numbers – or maybe not. They could easily report “paid subscriptions” even though millions like may have cancelled to the point of eating the loss. Otherwise, I can use the service in a way that causes some pain and increases their cost to have me as a customer. However, also from their Terms of Service, it says:

“Carbonite may terminate Your access to and use of the Services if You … (4) use a Service inappropriate for Your usage (for example, if You are backing up external hard drives and servers, You must use the appropriate Carbonite solution specially designed for such use), (5) use the Services in a manner that results in excessive bandwidth usage, as determined by Carbonite”

My guess is that Carbonite keeps statistics on which are the largest “abusers” of the service. Some users, I am sure, cost far more to keep than they paid is subscription pricing. I am guessing that if Carbonite terminates my access, then they would be obligated to refund my prorated subscription.

Anyway, it looks like this is a longer term proposition. I did mention on the chat session that I was personally responsible for at least 20 new subscribers to their service over the last couple years, and I will now be directing them to iDrive.

It seems like the chat person had the scripted answers at his/her instant access.

SmokeVanThorn | March 7, 2012 at 12:58 pm

Maher is only concerned that questions about him, such as the one asked at the recent press conference, will continue to be asked.